NFL Owners could have big impact on the Game:
 |
| Tom Brady 2001 vs. Raiders "Tuck Rule" |
The tuck rule, the
once-obscure-but-much-debated regulation that helped the New England
Patriots go to the Super Bowl in 2001, could disappear.
Instant
replay, which already interrupts the game more times than fans would care to see, could be amended so that a coach without a challenge
could still manage to have a play reviewed.
And defenses probably
will be glad to know that running backs such as Adrian Peterson soon may
be punished for leading with the crown of their helmet, instead of the
other way around.
Those are some of the several rule proposals
that could be adopted this week when the National Football League owners
convene for their annual meeting, which begins today.
The tuck
rule, though, probably will draw the most attention. It is one of six
proposed rule changes from the league's competition committee that may
be abandoned.
"What is happening is a great majority of these
plays are appropriately called fumbles," Atlanta Falcons president Rich
McKay, chairman of the competition committee, said on a conference call.
"Then officials go into replay and look at it, and under the rule if
the tuck had not been completed [the call] has to be reversed.
The
tuck rule became one of the most infamous in the league in 2001 when
Patriots quarterback Tom Brady appeared to lose a fumble late in an AFC
playoff game against the Oakland Raiders. The call was reversed under
the tuck rule, and the Patriots went on to beat the Raiders and advance
to the AFC Championship game against the Steelers at Heinz Field. "I think, basically, we
will at least potentially make it a little easier to officiate in terms
of the action of the quarterback bringing the ball back to his body is
no longer considered part of the pass," "I guess the bottom line is that it will be easier for a
quarterback to fumble the ball than the other result." New England Patriots Tom Brady Jersey - Boys 4-7 (Google Affiliate Ad)
The league
also will look at a proposal that allows a team that has no more video
challenges to still have the play reviewed, albeit with a 15-yard
penalty.
One of the reasons for the proposed change is what
happened on Thanksgiving when Detroit Lions Coach Jim Schwartz
challenged what officials ruled was an 81-yard scoring run by Houston's
Justin Forsett.
Because all scoring plays are automatically
reviewed, Schwartz negated use of replay when he threw the red challenge
flag. Even though Forsett was clearly down by contact during the run,
the touchdown stood and the Texans won in overtime.
The new
proposal is designed to ensure the play is reviewed and the right call
is made. However, the coach making the illegal challenge will draw a
15-yard penalty. Challenges that are deemed illegal are when a team is
out of timeouts, has used all its challenges, is in the final two
minutes of a half or overtime and on scoring plays or turnovers. If a coach would challenge in the final two minutes of a half or overtime, he will lose a timeout. Detroit Lions Critical Victory Iv Fleece Hoodie (Google Affiliate Ad)
 |
| "Adrian Peterson" - 'All-Day" |
Maybe the most
controversial new rule will be the one that would prohibit a running
back from using the crown of his helmet outside the tackle box -- a
proposal that could be targeted at Peterson, Minnesota's record-setting
running back.
Under the new rule -- one of three safety-related
proposals put before the owners -- the runner would be penalized 15
yards for forcible contact with the crown of his helmet when he chooses
to lower his head outside the tackle box. Incidental contact inside the
tackle box will still result in no foul.
"We really think the time
has come that we need to address the situation in space when a runner
or a tackler has a choice as to how they are going to approach the
opponent," McKay said. "We are trying to protect the runner or the
tackler from himself in that instance."
Thank you to Gerry Dulac:Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Read more: http://www.post-gazette.comFollow my Blog FP2 Football News
Comments
Post a Comment